O.C.G.A.
O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 16-11-34 (2019)

Preventing or disrupting lawful meetings, gatherings, or processions

✓ O.C.G.A. — 2019 edition (Public.Resource.Org Release 73)
Code text and O.C.G.A. statutory annotations on this page reflect the 2019 Official Code of Georgia Annotated (Public.Resource.Org Release 73, 2019-08-21; public domain per Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). The Syfert case-law annotations in Notes of Decisions, below, are current.
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section GA-LEGlegis.ga.gov (official) JustiaJustia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) A person who recklessly or knowingly commits any act which may reasonably be expected to prevent or disrupt a lawful meeting, gathering, or procession is guilty of a misdemeanor. (b) This Code section shall not be construed to affect the powers delegated to counties or to municipal corporations to pass laws to punish disorderly conduct within their respective limits.

History

(Code 1933, § 26-2605, enacted by Ga. L. 1968, p. 1249, § 1.)

Annotations

Cross references. - Open and public meetings, § 50-14-1 et seq. Law reviews. - For annual survey of criminal law, see 58 Mercer L. Rev. 83

(2006). For survey article on local government law, see 59 Mercer L. Rev. 285 (2007).

JUDICIAL DECISIONS Provisions of Ga. L. 1968, p. 1249, § 1 (see now O.C.G.A. § 16-11-34) were satisfied where defendants were at center of larger group, singing and shouting emanated from center of group, and noise caused students in classes to come to windows which necessarily dis-

rupted normal activity of the school. Washington v. State, 126 Ga. App. 180, 190 S.E.2d 138 (1972). Constitutionality. - O.C.G.A. § 16-11-34(a) was overbroad and was unconstitutional; the literal language of the statute was so overbroad in its scope that

it led to an absurdity manifestly not intended by the legislature, and its constitutionality could not have been preserved by judicial construction. State v. Fielden, 280 Ga. 444, 629 S.E.2d 252 (2006). Statute as basis for probable cause to arrest. - Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was not violated by the arrest of citizens who attended a city council meeting to express views on renaming a public park but refused to obey the rules of order because probable cause to arrest existed, even though O.C.G.A.

§ 16-11-34, which criminalized the disruption of a public meeting, was later struck down as unconstitutionally overbroad. Harris v. City of Valdosta, 616 F. Supp. 2d 1310 (M.D. Ga. 2009). Cited in Evans v. City of Tifton, 138 Ga. App. 374, 226 S.E.2d 471 (1976); Porter v. State, 141 Ga. App. 602, 234 S.E.2d 100 (1977); Davis v. State, 147 Ga. App. 107, 248 S.E.2d 181 (1978); Harper v. State, 249 Ga. 519, 292 S.E.2d 389 (1982); In re D.H., 283 Ga. 556, 663 S.E.2d 139 (2008).

RESEARCH REFERENCES Am. Jur. 2d. - 24 Am. Jur. 2d, Disturbing Meetings, § 3 et seq. ALR. - Conduct amounting to offense of disturbing public or religious meeting, 12 A.L.R. 650. Criminal offense of bribery as affected by lack of legal qualification of person assuming or alleged to be an officer, 115 A.L.R. 1263.

Participation of student in demonstration on or near campus as warranting imposition of criminal liability for breach of peace, disorderly conduct, trespass, unlawful assembly, or similar offense, 32 A.L.R.3d 551.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1985–2024 · leading case: State v. Fielden, 629 S.E.2d 252 (Ga. 2006).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Fielden, 629 S.E.2d 252 (Ga. 2006). · cites it 100× “2d 153 (2001), we conclude that OCGA § 16-11-34 provides a sufficiently definite warning to a person of ordinary intelligence of the prohibited conduct, namely, the reckless or knowing commission of any act which may reasonably be expected to disrupt or prevent a lawful meeting,…”
Freeman v. State, 805 S.E.2d 845 (Ga. 2017). · cites it 6× “” Freeman was originally indicted for obstruction of a police officer and for disorderly conduct pursuant to a different statute, OCGA § 16-11-34 (a), which states that “[a] person who recklessly *182 or knowingly commits any act which may reasonably be expected to prevent or…”
Williams, Congresswoman v. Powell, 320 Ga. 221 (Ga. 2024). · cites it 22× “The appellees filed a motion to dismiss the complaint in part, 7 OCGA § 16-11-34 (a) provides: “A person who recklessly or knowingly commits any act which may reasonably be expected to prevent or disrupt a lawful meeting, gathering, or procession is guilty of a misdemeanor.”
Rodriguez v. State, 671 S.E.2d 497 (Ga. 2009). · cites it 2× “Lynch, for appellants. Gwendolyn Keyes Fleming, District Attorney, Barbara B.”
Harris v. City of Valdosta, Ga., 616 F. Supp. 2d 1310 (M.D. Ga. 2009). · cites it 16× “Plaintiffs Rose and Head were charged with a violation of O.C.G.A. § 16-11-34, disturbance of meeting, gathering, or procession.”
Carr v. State, 335 S.E.2d 622 (Ga. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 4× “nd unbecoming language (OCGA § 16-11-41 (a)); used "fighting words" to Deputy Cummings by the use of "opprobrious or abusive words," without provocation, which were used in his presence and tended to provoke violent resentment (OCGA § 16-11-39 (1)); and disrupted a lawful…”
In re D. H., 663 S.E.2d 139 (Ga. 2008). · cites it 2× “at 444 , quoting OCGA§ 16-11-34 (a). Fielden, 280 Ga. at 444-445 .”
In the Interest of D. A. D., 481 S.E.2d 262 (Ga. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 2× “§ 26-2605 (now OCGA § 16-11-34)). Decided February 7, 1997.”
Williams, Congresswoman v. Powell (Ga. 2024). · cites it 23× “1 is unconstitutionally vague “as its terms fail to give fair warning to a citizen as to what conduct is permitted and insufficient guidance to law enforcement as to what 7 OCGA § 16-11-34 (a) provides: “A person who recklessly or knowingly commits any act which may reasonably…”
Freeman v. State (Ga. 2017). · cites it 8× “” 2 Freeman was originally indicted for obstruction of a police officer and for disorderly conduct pursuant to a different statute, OCGA § 16-11-34 (a), which states that “[a] person who recklessly or knowingly commits any act which may reasonably be expected to prevent or…”
In Re Dh, 663 S.E.2d 139 (Ga. 2008). · cites it 2× “2d 252 , quoting OCGA § 16-11-34(a). [3] Fielden, 280 Ga. at 444-445 , 629 S.”
— 16-11-34(a) — 2 cases
State v. Fielden, 629 S.E.2d 252 (Ga. 2006). “2d 153 (2001), we conclude that OCGA § 16-11-34 provides a sufficiently definite warning to a person of ordinary intelligence of the prohibited conduct, namely, the reckless or knowing commission of any act which may reasonably be expected to disrupt or prevent a lawful meeting,…”
In Re Dh, 663 S.E.2d 139 (Ga. 2008). “2d 252 , quoting OCGA § 16-11-34(a). [3] Fielden, 280 Ga. at 444-445 , 629 S.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.